Aleister & Amanitas (disinformation)

      8 Comments on Aleister & Amanitas (disinformation)

Aleister & Amanitas by Phillip Newman.

The English occultist Aleister Crowley was notorious for his penned practical pranks. From discussing sex magick in terms of diabolical child sacrifice to potentially discussing psychedelic drug use under the cloak of sex magick, Crowley was a master of the art of obscurum per obscurius; of “explaining the obscure by means of the more obscure.” While we know from his diaries that he certainly was wont to engage in magick of the sexual variety, it is our suspicion that, in at least some instances, when Crowley was outwardly explaining sex magick in his books, he may well have actually been discussing the occult use of Amanita muscaria mushrooms. The same would be in perfect keeping with his modus operandi, i.e., obscurum per obscurius.

Source: Aleister & Amanitas – disinformation

Related Images:

Subscribe
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

8 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jamie J Barter

This is an interesting & imaginative theory and one to which I would like to be able to give at least some measure of credence for ingenuity alone, but the thing that stops it being some sort of a Thelemic update on Allegro’s Sacred Mushroom and the Cross is the inconvenient fact that, as the author duly goes on to recognize, Crowley made no direct references himself to the A. muscaria mushroom anywhere throughout his extensive writings or pictorially, apart from depicting this one specimen in May Morn.

Michael Staley

Why on earth would Crowley disguise his references to Amanita Muscaria in the first place, let alone as sex magick? After all, he showed little reticence in discussing a multitude of other drugs.

Jamie J Barter

Philip Newman goes on to state that:

“Perhaps it was due to an oath of secrecy. Perhaps we’re completely off the mark (as well as off our rocker). The only safe thing we can say at this point is that obligations of secrecy never stopped Aleister Crowley from writing before.”

Maybe that’s it, then (that he’s off his rocker?)!

Incidentally, while on the subject didn’t I see a crazy Comment by one “mermaid tampon” the last time I passed this way, or was I imagining things?

N Joy

christibrany

I saw it too. It was so crazy it reminded me of something written by a bot trying to appear human

Michael Staley

I should imagine that it was removed by the moderator, and quite rightly too.

Jamie J Barter

Just so – but the odd thing is, that such a Comment would have had to have already been “pre-moderated” to have been allowed to appear in the first place?! (Just as this Comment, and all other Comments to the News features, would need to be also).

N Joy